Connole v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co.
District Court, S.D. Ohio
At I ,aw. Action by T. J. Connole against the Norfolk & Western Railway Company. On motion to strike out petition.
1Opinion of the Court
SATER, District Judge.
The defendant by its- motion seeks an interpretation of section 51 of the Ohio Workmen's Compensation Act (103 Ohio L., 72, 90) a copy of which is set forth in the margin.1
[1] Plaintiff says that the averments in the petition do not admit of any construction other than that the defendant was entirely occupied at the time of his -injury in purely intrastate commerce, but as to this counsel do not agree. An interstate carrier may, through the same employé or employés, engage at a given time in intrastate commerce, and at another in interstate commerce. Illinois Cent. R.…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Knowlton v. MooreSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- United States Ex Rel. Attorney General of the United States v. Delaware & Hudson Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
- United States v. FisherSupreme Court of the United States · 1805
- Illinois Central Railroad v. BehrensSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Bate Refrigerating Co. v. SulzbergerSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Mushel v. SchulzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1918
- Powers v. MurrayMichigan Supreme Court · 1934
- Hogan v. Baltimore & O. R.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1926